All this shít being lost about the BBC allegedly photoshopping Our Jeremy

[Peter]

Perhaps, although there is a credible counter-argument to what we're saying which is that if it wasn't for the Brexit protest votes, Corbyn would have been wiped out at the last GE and all of the media attacks against him would have been hailed as highly effective.

A scruffy argument but certainly a factor. I am not even sure I would call it a Brexit protest vote. The aftermath of the referendum saw a considerable rebalancing in voting behaviour as UKIP voters did not in every case return to their fold. It remains to be seen whether that was a protest or a long term shift in behaviour.

As I have said before, the Conservatives are very worried. In three elections following a global collapse presided over by the Labour Party, and following 13 years out of power, they have managed one tiny majority- and even that depended on a promise of a referendum. Traditional patterns would have seen them walk the 2010 and 2015 elections. I sense something bigger than just Brexit.

[Monty92]

A scruffy argument but certainly a factor. I am not even sure I would call it a Brexit protest vote. The aftermath of the referendum saw a considerable rebalancing in voting behaviour as UKIP voters did not in every case return to their fold. It remains to be seen whether that was a protest or a long term shift in behaviour.

As I have said before, the Conservatives are very worried. In three elections following a global collapse presided over by the Labour Party, and following 13 years out of power, they have managed one tiny majority- and even that depended on a promise of a referendum. Traditional patterns would have seen them walk the 2010 and 2015 elections. I sense something bigger than just Brexit.

Sure, UKIP voters returning to Labour after they'd made a manifesto commitment to a meaningful Brexit was certainly a factor too.

Of course there's plenty more than Brexit at play. The disaster of the housing market and a sense that austerity (while once a necessity) has gone on for too long, for kick off.

[Peter]

Sure, UKIP voters returning to Labour after they'd made a manifesto commitment to a meaningful Brexit was certainly a factor too.

Of course there's plenty more than Brexit at play. The disaster of the housing market and a sense that austerity (while once a necessity) has gone on for too long, for kick off.

Which kind of suggests that Cameron's pledge was the difference between the two parties in 2015. That is hugely worrying for Conservative HQ.

The housing market thing is hilariously tragic. THe notion that we are short of millions of houses is pretty laughable if only for the very obvious fact that if we were, millions of people would be homeless.

THe shortage is to do with the millions of properties in the hands of private landlords and the fact that the way the market works means that if you dont own you are on the wrong side of it. A fifth of houses are owned by private landlords, including 40% of houses sold under 'right to buy'.

Building new houses wont solve this. Within a few years a huge chunk of those new houses will be sat in the hands of the same landlords.

If you want to tackle the housing shortage, tackle that.

[Burney]

A scruffy argument but certainly a factor. I am not even sure I would call it a Brexit protest vote. The aftermath of the referendum saw a considerable rebalancing in voting behaviour as UKIP voters did not in every case return to their fold. It remains to be seen whether that was a protest or a long term shift in behaviour.

As I have said before, the Conservatives are very worried. In three elections following a global collapse presided over by the Labour Party, and following 13 years out of power, they have managed one tiny majority- and even that depended on a promise of a referendum. Traditional patterns would have seen them walk the 2010 and 2015 elections. I sense something bigger than just Brexit.

This wildly underestimates the impact of Blair Government's quite extraordinary gerrymandering of the electoral boundaries - which has meant that tory seats are invariably larger and that the tories must win far more votes to gain a seat than Labour.

[Peter]

This wildly underestimates the impact of Blair Government's quite extraordinary gerrymandering of the electoral boundaries - which has meant that tory seats are invariably larger and that the tories must win far more votes to gain a seat than Labour.

Nonsense. THis has always been a factor, largely due to Labour's popularity in smaller, inner city constituencies. THis did not start with Blair.

What I did wildly underestimate is the huge unpopularity of Blair, his war and his chums in the party, which is yet another reason why the 2010 result was such a massive disappointment for the Conservatives.

I havent even mentioned the collapse of the Lib Dems yet. Another factor in voter realignment. THe Lib Dems had held my seat since 1997, quite comfortably. They lost it in 2015 and Labour, a distant third with a minute proportion of the vote now sit second, missing the seat in the last election by just 4000 or so.